E 458 
.2 

.fl75 
Copy 1 



E 458 
.2 

.fl75 
Copy 1 








fxA ^ 





Class 1^ 



Book ' P\'\^ 



t 

CONFISCATE THE PROPERTY AND FREE THE SLAVES OF REBELS. 



"^^ 



SPEECH 



OF 



HON. I. N. ARNOLD, OF ILL, 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

May 23. 1862. 



The^House having under consideration the bills to confiscate the property and free from 
servitude the slaves of rebels — 

Mr. ARNOLD said : Mr. Speaker, I listened on yesterday with great 
respect to the eloquent argument of the gentleman from KenCucky [Mr. Gri- 
der] against this bill. He made an affecting appeal to the forbearance and 
magnanimity of this House in behalf of traitors whose hands are red with 
the blood of the brave and patriotic soldiers of Illinois and Kentucky, killed 
in this most wicked war. He appealed to us in behalf of those who drop 
poison in the cup which they hand to the famishing soldier; who treacherously 
hide torpedoes in abandoned fortifications to mui'der the brave men whom they 
dare not meet in open, honorable warfare. Towards such men, treacherous, 
cruel, reckless, restrained by no lav/, human or divine, seeking to kill, mur- 
der, and destroy every loyal man, and to take the life of the nation, we 
are asked to extend " magnanimity and forbearance." Sir, we have all along, 
since the beginning of this rebellion, been too magnanimous and forbearing, 
until our very kindness and forbearance to the rebels and traitors has been 
regarded by them as an indication of our weakness and cowardice. The}^ 
must be made to feel our power. They must be made to respect the majesty 
of that justice which punishes crime. It will be time to be magnanimous and 
forgiving when they throw down their arms and appeall to the mercy of that 
Government they have failed to destroy. 

SLAVERY, DEFEATED AT THE BALLOT-BOX, APPEALED TO THE SWORD AND BROUGHT OX THIS 

WAR. 

In the face of the stupendous'events transpiring in our midst, the slavery 
question cannot be ignored. It is idle to seek to ignore it. It will not down 
at the bidding of any. We must grapple and meet it. The skilful pliysician 
might as well ignore the existence of a terrible disease threatening the death 
of his struggling patient, as the statesman seek to ignore or disregard the dis- 
ease of slavery, now threatening the life of the nation. No man has spoken 
more wisely, cautiously, philosophically, on this subject than tlie President of 
the United States. Listen to the- words of Abraham Lincoln, spoken at 
Springfield in 1858. He said : 

" A house divided against itself cannot sUnd. I believe that this Government cannot en- 
dure permauently half slave and half free. I do not expect the house to fall. T do not expect 
the Union to dissolve, but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one 
thing or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it and 
place it where the public mind will rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate ex- 



tinction. or its advocates will push it forward, until it shall become alike lawful in all the 
States, the old as well as the new. North as well as South." 

When Abraham Lincoln uttered these sentiments, sagacious and truthful 
as the}^ are, lie did not dream of an}^ conflict between liberty and slavery but 
a moral one. That contest was fought out in 18G0 at the ballot-box, and 
freedom triumphed. The weapons of freedom by which that victory was 
achieved were the press, free speech, the lecture, the pulpit, the newspaper, 
the school-house, the church, above all, the free, honest ballot. We fought 
against tiie encroachments of the aristocracy of slavery with ballots and not 
with bullets. We believed 

" There was a wreapon firmer set, 
And better than the bayonet; 
A weapon that comes down as still 
As snow-flakes fall upon the sod, 
But executes a freeman's will, 

As lightnings do the will of God." 

Slavery, like all great wrongs, has always resorted to violence. It used the 
bowie-knife of the border-ruffians in Kansas. Its weapons have been lynch- 
law and mob violence to silence the freeman's tongue and shut the patriot's 
mouth. It was .a peaceful moral conflict, where reason should contend against 
wrong, which tlie late Senator from New^ York termed the '' irrepressible con- 
flict.'' 

Freedom having triumphed at the ballot-box, slavery appealed to the sword, 
and brouglit upon the country this terrible desolating war. The contest still 
rages. It is idle to seek to disguise it ; we fight for liberty and the Constitu- 
tion. The rebels fight for slavery and the subversion of constitutional liberty. 
It is liberty against slavery, right against Avrong, civilization against barba- 
rism. The' rebels, fighting for a barbarous institution, fight like inhuman 
barbarians. 

Commencing the contest with perjury, with robbery, with larceny, they have 
disgraced the American name by their unparalleled brutalities. They poison 
wells and, springs ; they hold out to the famishing soldier the food charged 
with arsenic. The cup of southern hospitality, in rebel hands, has become 
the cup of death to the confiding soldier. They murder wounded men on 
the field of battle ; they violate the sanctity of a flag of truce ; they dese- 
crate and mutilate the remains of the gallant soldiers who fall in a manner 
more infamous than the savages* of those barbarous islands where the light 
of Christianity has never penetrated. 

I ask what has transformed the noble, humane, generous. Christian gentle- 
men of the South into such barbarians ? How is it that the land which pro- 
duced a Washington, a Henry, a J.eff"erson, a John Marshall, now produces a 
Floyd, a Wise, a Jefferson Davis? Whence the degeneracy of this noble 
race? It is true we recognise many noble exceptions to this degeneracy. No 
more patriotic and unselfish men ever lived than some of the Union men of 
the slave States. 

THE PRESIDENT SEEKS TO CONTROL THE WHIRLWIND SLAVERY HAS RAISED. 

I haTe quoted the words of Abraham Lincoln uttered in 1858 ; listen to the 
words of the President of the United States to-day, still calm and cautious., 
seeking " to control the whirlwind and direct the storm." In the light of the 
past, hear his utterances of to-day. 

On the 6th of March last the President solemnly proposed to Congress the 
inauguration of a gradual system of emancipation. His proposition was heard 
with delight, and adopted by large majorities of both Houses of Congress. 



His proposition was welcomed by the world as "an authentic, definite, and 
solemn proposition of the nation" gradually and peacefully to terminate the 
existence of human slavery. It was a proposition which will culminate in 
making freedom not only '^ national," but universal, wherever the flag of our 
Union floats. Tiiis message struck the key-note, and gave form to the grand 
idea of liberty throbbing for expression in the popular heart. The institution' 
of slavery, having, the sin of this . rebellion on its head, must, in process of 
time, cease to exist. Its prolonged life is incompatible with the national life, 
and it must die. '' I believe," says Abraham Lincoln, " this Government 
cannot endure permanently half slave and half free." 

The President desires the inevitable change to be peaceful, gradual, con- 
stitutional. Hence he says to the loyal slaveholders : 

"I do not argue, I beseech you to make the argument for yourselves. You cannot, if you 
would, be blind to the signs of the times. The proposal makes common cause, for a common 
object, casting no reproach upon any." "^ * "^••' ''' " The change it contem- 
plates would come gently as the dews of heaven — not rending or wrecking anything. Will 
you not embrace it ? So much good has not been done by one effort in all past time, as, in 
the providence of God, it is now your high privilege to do. May the vast future not have to 
lament that you have neglected it."' 

To this earnest appeal of the President every lover of liberty throughout 
the world responds, " amen." And thus, and to this end, the President ab- 
rogates the proclamation of freedom issued by the blunt and gidlant Hunter, 
and gives to South Carolina even, her hands dripping with the blood of this 
ci^l war, one more chance for submission and gradual change. 



HAVE FAITH IN AP.RAHAM LINCOLX. 



Lovers of liberty, and patriots, impatient of this delay in striking at the great 
criminal, I pra}^ you trust Abraham Lincoln. Have faith in the P.resident. He 
will not neghct the opportunity which the providence of God has given him. 
Peacefully, " gently as the dews of heaven," will come the blessings of lib- 
erty — if it may be. Like the bright beams of the morning sun, dispelling the 
darkness, clouds, and exhalations of black night, so will freedom dispel the 
darkness and barbarisrn of slavery. " You cannot," men of the border 
States, patriots of the border States, " be blind to the signs of the times." I 
beg you to join hands with the President ; help to make this one great, homo- 
geneous, free people. " So much good has not been done by one eflbrt in all 
past time." Look at this capital, now free, but so long paralysed by slavery ;• 
look across yonder noble river to Arlington House, crumbling to ruin ; take 
your melancholy way "to Alexandria and Mount Vernon ; go down yonder most 
magnificent Chesapeake bay to the ancient city of Norfolk; see those great tribu- 
tary rivers, the Potomac, the Rappahannock, the York, and the James ; sir, on 
the banks of these waters, now so lonely and desolate, should have been the 
seat of empire. Virginia was, should have been, would have been, the 
empire State of this Union but for slavery. I have lately sailed over these 
magni^cent waters, seen their beauty, their natural advantages, and — their 
desolation. There is no more melancholy spectacle than the material decay 
and moral degeneracy of the " Old Dominion." Oh, border State men and 
men of the free States, why stay the hand that strikes down the great cause 
of this ruin and desolation '? Why will you seek to restore to life and vigor 
this cursed institution of slavery, now dying by its own hand 1 Why not let 
the suicide of slavery be consummated ? Democrats of the free States, if you 
warm this insidious viper again into life, if you take it to you*' bosom and re- 
store its power, be sure, like the serpent in the fable, it will sting you to 
death. Remember, I beseech .you, its treatment of your idol, Douglas. 



In urging tlie passage by Congress of these acts the suggestions which I 
"beg leave to present for consideration naturally range themselves under one 
or other of the following heads : 

I. The right of Congress to pass such a confiscation law. 

II. The justice and expediency of such a law.* 

First. The right of Congress to pass a general confiscation law. 

The right of Congress to pass an act for the confiscation of the property 
of persons engaged in the existing ins-urrection has, to a certain extent, al- 
ready received the sanction of Congress. The act to " further provide for 
the collection of duties, approved Jivly 13, 1861," authorized the seizure and 
condemnation of all goods, and chattels- in transitu between the loyal and in- 
surrectionary States, together with the vessel or vehicle conveying the same, 
and the act of August 6, 1861, authorized the confiscation of property used 
for insurrectionary purposes, and forfeited the claim of the master to the ser- 
vice of any person held by him to service when the slave was employed by the 
master to aid the insurrection in the manner therein stated. 

The preceding legislation rests for its legality upon the same basis as the 
law now proposed. The extent to which Congress will go in the exercise of 
its power is a question of policy ; the nature and source of the power is the 
same. It is a right belonging to the Government, under the law of nations, 
in time of war, and which is included in the power to declare war conferred 
by the Constitution. The right to confiscate and condemn enemy's property' 
in time of war was very fully considered and settled in the case of Brown vs. 
The United States, reported first in 2 Gallison's Reports, and decided on ap- 
peal ^ in the Supreme Court, in 8 Cranch. In that case the property libeled 
consisted of a quantity of lumber belonging to a British subject, and found 
after the declaration of war in New Bedford, Massachusetts. In the case 
below, Judge Story, after the most learned review of all the authorities, ar- 
rived at the following conclusions : 

1. That a nation may lawfully confiscate the debts of her enemy during wai* 
or by way of reprisal, and cited Ware vs. Hylton, 3*Dallas, 199. 

2. That the right of confiscation of the goods of an enemy found within the 
dominions of a belligerent Power is universally admitted^ citing all the lead- 
ing writers on public law. 

i 3. Story held that, without any act of Congress, the mere declaration of 
war did ex vi termini authorize the capture of all enemy's property wher- 
ever, by the law of nations, it could be lavrfally seized, and that where no act 
of Congress was made on the subject, the benefit of all such captures must 
inure to the use of the Government. He adhered to this opinion in the ap- 
pellate court, and maintained that " the right of confiscation resulted not from 
the express provisions of any statute," but " from the very state of war 
which subjects the hostile property to the disposal of the Government." 
" The power to d-eclare war includes all the powers incident to w^ir and 
necessary to carry it into efiect." " He was at a loss to perceive how the 
power existed to seize and capture enemy's property which was without our 
territory at the commencement of the war, and not the power to seize that 
which was within it at the same period." ^' Neither are expressly given or de- 
nied ; and how can either be assumed except as an incident of war on national 
and public principles 1 That if the legislature did not limit the nature of 
the war, all th^ regulations and rights of general war attach upon it. 



♦ I have drawn freely in these views from a very able brief in favor of confiscation prepared by E. C Larned 
Esq., United States District Attorney for Illinois. ' 



In the opinion of the majority of the court, given by Chief Justice Marshall, 
it was hekl — 

" That, respecting the power of the Government, no clou])t was entertained."' . ^" That war 
giv«s to the sovereign full right to take the persons and eonfiscate the property of the enemy 
whercv-er found, is conceded." 

But that the mere declaration of war did not, of itself, enact a confiscation of 
property within the territory of the belligerent. That the power of confiscat- 
ing enemy's property is in the legislature, and that an act of Congress is ne- 
cessary to authorize proceedings for the condemnation of enemy's property 
within the country at the commencement of the w*ar. TWs authority conclu- 
sively settles the power of Congress to confiscate the property of enemies in 
time of war, and the necessity for the passage of an act of Congress to author- 
ize such condemnation. 

I beg leave to read, in confirmation of these views, the following extract 
from a work on The Laws of War, by General Halleck : 

" The necessity pf self-preservation, and the right to punish an enemy, and to deprive him 
of the ijieans of injuring us, byconverting these means to our own use against him, lio at the 
foundation of the rule, and constitute the right of a belligerent to enemy's property of any 
kind ; and it is diflicult to see why this rfght should be restricted to a particular species of 
property, to cattle, horses, money, ships, goods, and not include lands and immovables," &c. 

I add, why restrict to horses or lands especially if " contrabands," negroes, 
are more hurtful to us in the hands of the enemy, and more useful if under our 
own control ] The slave States live, to a considerable extent, on the labor 
of their slaves. Like the Jew, the traitors would be forced to exclaim, " you 
take my life when you do take from me the means whereby I live." 

The only remaining question is, whether there is any diflerence in respect to 
the power of Congress to confiscate the property of enemies^ growing out of the 
fact that the enemies whose property is to be affected are not citizens of a 
foreign country which is at war with, the United States, but citizens of the 
Unittd States who are in insurrection against and w^aglng war upon their own 
Government ? 

This subject received the most elaborate and thorough examination in the 
case of tlie United States vs. The bark Hiawatha, and the United States vs,- 
Bark Octavia, and other vessels, recently decided by Judge Betts in the 
southern district of New York. In these cases Judge Betts held : 

" That under the law of nations, the rights incident to a war waged by a Government to 
subdue an insurrection or revolt of its own subjects or citizens are the same in regard to neu- 
tral Powers as if the hostilities were carried on between independent nations, and apply equally 
in captu es of property for municipal offences as prize of war, citing Rosers. Nimely, 4 Cranch, 
241-293 ; Appendix, 509 ; 7 Wheaton, 306. 

" That the insurgents, so far as their own acts can make them, are as alien and foreign 
from the United states Government as if they assumed the names of citizens and subjects of 
Mexico and South America. 

" They thus make themselves armed enemies, and wage war against the United States to 
accomplish its dismemberment and destruction. It can be of no consequence under what name 
or apj)ellation these enemies unite and act, whether as State secessionists, southerners, or 
slaveholders. They are in every just contemplation of our system of Government insurgents 
and rebels against a common Government, and waging war for its overthrow. 

" I consider the outbreak in particular States, as also in the confederate States, as an open 
and iiagrant civil war waged against the United States. That citizens of the United States 
levying war against the United States are enemies of the Government notwithstanding their 
resideUce within the Union, and that the property possessed and held by them in a state of 
war, out of and against the authority of the United States, becomes thus the property of ene- 
mies of the Government, subject to confiscation when arrested at sea, and persons continuing 
■within the authority and dominion of such enemies are clothed with the character and respon- 
sibilities of enemies because of their residence, without regard to their private sentiments." 

It is conceded that the w^ords " arrested at sea " were used simply with 
reference to the facts of the cases before him. There is no difference in prin- 



ciple between the riglit of confiscation of enemies' property on sea or onshore. 
The only dlfiercnce is in respect to the admiralty jurisdiction. This case 
establishes the position that the rebels are public enemies in war against this 
Government, and liable to the same penalties, in the way of confiscation of 
property, as the alien enemies of a foreign Government with which we were 
in a state of war. (For full opinion of Judge Betts in this case, see New 
York Evening Post of October, 1861.) 

Civil war is called by Grotius^ '' a mixed war, public on the side of the es- 
tablished Government, and "private on the part of the people resisting its au- 
thority, and gives belligerent rights against .the rebels and other nations 
aiding them." (Wheaton's International Law, p. 4, chap. 1, sec. T ; Vattel, 
book 3, chap. 18, sees. 292-295.) 

The law, as pronounced in the above opinion of Judge Betts, is similarly 
stated in the opinion of' the district court of Pennsylvania for the eastern 
district, in the case of The United States vs. Ship General Parkhill, which 
was, in that case, condemned as being the property of citizens of Charleston, 
enemies of the United States ; also in the case of The United States vs. 
Schooner Tropic W^nd, in the admiralt/ court in the District of Columbia. 
The opinions in these cases review the whole law, and arrive at the same 
conclusions above started. 

The power of Congress to confiscate the property of all persons engaged 
in the prese4it insurrection, and to pass an act for that purpose, conferring 
authority upon the proper tribunals of the. country to enforce such right, may 
be considered as settled. It is res adjudicata. It is based alike upon reason 
and authority, and cannot now be considered as an open question. 

II. The justice and expediency of such a law. 

1. If in the case of ordinary war between foreign Powers, the property 
of alien enemies is subject to be confiscated, how much more should that 
of these,* who are not only enemies but rebels, who are not only belligerents 
but traitors, and not only so, but rebels and. traitors to the best, mildest, and 
most benignant Government which exists on earth. What can be said or thought 
in extenuation of the crime of men who are plotting the overthrew of the Ameri- 
can Union and the destruction of American liberty 1 The atrocious wicked- 
ness of this rebellion is beyond all expression, and its utter want of all suffi- 
cient justification or excuse makes it the more unparalleled in its criminality. 
The annals of t^ie world furnish no counterpart to it. In time of profound 
peace and. prosperity,, with no just cause of complaint, no evils or wrongs of 
any kind beyond the reach of legislation, these men have rushed this great 
country into this terrible and desolating civil war. They are seeking to de- 
stroy the great Republic in which the hopes of humanity are centred. Surely 
there should be no half-way measures with such men ; there should be no sym- 
pathy for such treason; there should be no disposition to deal softly in such a 
case. Justice demands that these rebels and traitors to the Republic should 
be dealt with as such. The citizens of the loyal States demand that these 
men, while acting as rebels and traitors, should in every possible way be made 
to feel the consequences of their crimes ; that they should be made to suffer as 
much as possible in every way in which it is in our power to affect them so 
long as they remain in arms against us, and there is no more potent and effect- 
ive method than through the loss of their property. 

2. Not only do justice and right demand such a measure, ,but it is neces- 
sary as a measure of retaliation. For months these people have been seizing 
and confiscating the property of the citizens of the loyal States. They did so 
for a long period without even any pretence of law or authority of their own, 



and tliey have since atteuipted to give to tlicir proceedings the pretended 
sanction of law b}^ enacting in their pretended congress a general sweeping 
act of confiscation of all the propert}^ of citizens of the loyal States. It would 
be hard, indeed^ for the citizens who are loyal to the Constitution and the 
Union to be compelled to submit to the .confiscation of their property by these 
rebels for no other reason than because they remain true to the Government of 
their fathers, while these rebels and traitors are permitted to retain* all which 
belongs to them in the loyal States. This is in truth a reward for treason. 
The traitors arc allowed all their own property, and also all the spoils of that 
of loyal citizens found within their reach. 

In the border States, where victory and defeat alternate, and whole sec- 
tions of country are alternately in possession of the contending parties, the 
present system is a premium on treason. Its effect is to throw tlie powerful 
influence of the property interest on the side of rebellion. For if a man in 
these States declares for the Union, and the confederates are victorious, all 
he has is swept away by them ; while if he declares for the confederates, and 
the Unionists succeed, his property is entirely safe under the existing legisla- 
tion. The property of Jeff. Davis himself could not lawfully be interfered 
with as the law now stands, unless it could be made to appear that it had 
been used directly in aiding the rebellion. 

S. Such a measure is demanded to meet the wishes of the loyal American 
people at this time. They demand in eV^ery quarter of the country that these 
men should be dealt with as they deserve ; that they should not only be termed 
rebels and traitors, but made to feel the punishment which belongs to such 
crimes. The unanimous voice of the country demands such a measure, and 
it will be hailed in every section with entire approval. 

4. No measure would give* to the country more satisfactory assurance that 
the Government was in earnest in its design to suppress this rebellion. It 
would evince the firm, determined spirit which the people expect and demand. 

A PARTY IN SYMPATHY WITH TRAITORS IS ORGANIZING TO DIVIDE THE NORTH. 

Mr. Speaker, I have seen with regret that there is a party in the country 
seeking to divide the North ; a party which is the especial guardian and pro- 
tector of slavery ; a party that is industriously sowing the seeds of discord 
and division, seeking to create distrust of their Government in the minds of 
the people ; men who exaggerate and magnify the frauds and corruptions of 
subordinates, and proclaim and use them, not to secure purity, retrenchment, 
and economy, but simply to make political capital.- These men hate a black 
loyalist, however brave and patriotic, more than a white traitor. They will 
split hairs on technical quibbles to save rebels. They seem to think it is bet- 
ter that ninety-nine traitors should escape, rather than have one negro go free. 
They are ever holding up the Constitution as a shield to protect the traitors, 
while such traitors are making war upon it. Sucli men attack the President 
and attack the Secretary of War. Why is Mr. Stanton so bitterly assailed 
by those men? Simply because he is in earnest, and means to crush the 
rebels and punish the traitors at any sacrifice. He is for his country, and 
has no remote sympathy with traitors. His offence has " this extent, no 
more." 

Slavery is the corner-stone of this rebellious Confederacy. Can you have 
permanent peace with slavery the dominant power in the land? Has not our 
country sacrificed enough for this institution ? Turn over the pages of the 
last year's history. How many noble, gallant spirits have passed away. 
Their names and memories will live in our hearts j they will brighten our coua- 



8 

try's l)lstoi7, and hallow forever our national songs. 'But for slavery they would 
have all been living to-day: Lyon and Wintlirop and Ellsworth and Baker and 
Wallace, and a host of other gallant patriots, all martyrs in this cause; but 
the undistinguished, brave privates and subordinates, hurritd into nameless 
graves. Let us remember that each has left a vacant place around some 
hearthstone in some family circle. Go anywhere in the West, into any church, 
in town, city, village^ or country, and the dark habiliments of mourning meet 
your eye. The sad faces of widows, mothers, and sisters tell how wide-spread 
are the victims of this treason. There has fallen no gallant soldier in all 
this year of desolation, but, if- there had been no slavery in our land, would 
to-day have been living each in his own family circle. When you see a wounded 
soldier on his crutch, when you, see him with an arm or a leg shot away, 
struggling, with his impaired powers, to gain a livelihood, you remember, and 
be sure that he will never forget, that slavery caused his wounds. 

Now, who are the conservatives who would preserve an^ institution so de- 
structive 1 There are those who adopt the name of conservatives to preserve 
slavery from destruction, rebel property from confiscation, and rebel necks 
from the halter. From all such conservatives " Good Lord deliver us." 
There is another class who wish to preserve the Constitution, the life of the . 
nation, liberty, and all which is dear to us — to preserve these by destroying 
through peaceful, constitutional means the great enemy of all — slavery : of 
this class of conservatives the noblest type, in my judgment, is found in hon- 
est Abraham Lincoln. 

Mr. DIVEN. I wish to inquire of the gentleman from Illinois whether he 
referred to the case decided by Chief Justice Marshall, where the property of 
a British subject was taken, he not being preseiit. 

Mr. ARNOLD. Yes; it is the 'case of a British subject whose property 
was found in tiiis country. 

Mr. DIVEN. I know the case. I ask the gentleman if he knows of any 
case in modern warfare where the property of private citizens has been taken 
for the public use 1 If the gentleman has such a case, I should like to hear 
it. I have looked in vain for such a case. 

Mr. ARNOLD. There are plenty of such cases. I ask the gentleman to 
listen to the comments of Chancellor Kent on the case of Brown. 

Mr. DIVEN. I have read them. 

Mr. ARNOLD. I will read. In the Commentaries of Chancellor Kent, 
(vol. 1, p. 67,) after commenting on the case of Brown, the case referred to 
by the gentleman from New York, he says : 

'• When the case was brought up, on appeal, before the Supreme Court of the United States, 
the broad principle was assumed that u-ar gave to the sovcreiyn full right to talce the persons 
and confiscate the projyerty of the cnemy^ icherevcr found; and that the mitigation of . this 
rigid rule, which the wise and humane policj of uiodern times had introduced into practice, 
might more or less affect the exercise of the right, but could not impair the right itself." 

Commending this declaration of the great judge of New York to the con- 
sideration of the gentleman, I yield the floor. 



WASHINGTON, D. C. 

SCAMMELL &. CO., PRINTERS, CORNER OF SECOND STREET k INDIANA ATETTUE, THlRB FLOOR 

LB D Q5 ^^^^- 



tl^f^f^RV OF 





LIBRARY OF cor 




011 933 3 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




011 933 368 4 



